RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01683
		INDEX CODE:  102.07
		COUNSEL:  NONE	

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her date of rank (DOR) to staff sergeant (E-5) be corrected/adjusted to 1 March 1998.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She should be allowed a DOR adjustment based on previously serving as an E-5 in the Regular Air Force.  She contends that the governing regulation is outdated and does not specifically address her situation as a disenrolled cadet with prior service.

In support of her request, applicant provided a copy of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, a copy of a letter from AFPC/IG, a copy of Special Order AJ-157, a copy of AFI 36-2604, Service Dates and Dates of Rank, and a copy of Interim Change Notification 2001-1 to AFI 36-2604.

Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 13 April 1990 and was honorably discharged in the pay grade of E-5 after serving 11 years and 2 months total active federal military service (TAFMS).  On 16 August 2001, the applicant enlisted with the Air Force Reserve for the sole purpose of attending Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC).  On 11 April 2002 member was disenrolled from AFROTC and on 7 July 2002 involuntarily recalled to Extended Active Duty (EAD) for a period of 24 months to fulfill a contractual military commitment.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPAEQ recommends denial.  The DOR was computed in a fair and equitable manner and within governing directives and Reserve 
Contract.  Recommend the applicant’s DOR remain 16 August 2001.  

The DPPAEQ evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states that the OPR recommendation is not warranted.  The directive is outdated and does not address her situation.  AFI 36-2604 states, “Former AFROTC cadets ordered to EAD under Title 10, USC., 2105 and 2107, keep the date of rank specified on their reserve enlistment contract.”  It implies that former AFROTC cadets did not have a previous DOR.  Eighteen or nineteen year old cadet disenrolled from AFROTC have to give back time or money to the Air Force and have to be involuntarily recalled to active duty.  They have no DOR to reinstate.  She has over eleven years prior service and should not fall into that category.  She was only recalled to active duty because that is what the regulation stated.  The regulation is outdated and does not specifically address former AFROTC cadets with prior service.  Over the past few years there have been numerous disenrolled former AFROTC cadets with prior service.  It does not seem fair that the regulation does not address this situation and just arbitrarily take away the DOR that was worked so hard to attain.

Her complete submission is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  The applicant contends that the governing regulation AFI 36-2604 is outdated and does not specifically address her situation.  Nonetheless, it is the current governing authority that outlines date of rank for disenrolled AFROTC cadets.  Furthermore, evidence has not been provided which would lead us to believe that the rules of the applicable regulations were inappropriately applied or that she was denied rights to which she was entitled.  Therefore, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2003-01683 in Executive Session on 5 August 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 May 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAEQ, dated 4Jun 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jun 03.
    Exhibit E   Letter, Applicant, dated 24 Jun 03.

                                   Panel Chair